New York Post's Subway Death Photo: Was It Ethical Photojournalism?

Jeff Bercovici
,
Forbes Staff
I cover technology with an emphasis on social and digital media.

When a news photographer witnesses a tragedy in the making, is his obligation to intervene or to document it?

That question has cropped up anew following the New York Post's publication, on its front page, of a photo taken moments after a man was pushed onto subway tracks, and moments before he was hit and killed by an oncoming train.

The photographer, R. Umar Abbasi, claims he got the shot only incidentally, as he was firing off his camera in hopes the flash would attract the attention of the train driver. It's the sort of explanation that raises more questions than it answers, among them: Was there something more effective he could've done to help? And if there was, was he under obligation to do it?

I put those questions to John Long of the National Press Photographers Association. Long has been a photographer for 35 years, most of them at the Hartford Courant, and has been chairman of the NPPA's ethics committee for more than 15.

He was unwilling to offer an opinion on Abbasi's actions, not knowing enough of the particulars. "I cannot judge the man," he says. "I don't know how far away he was. I don't know if he could've done anything." (The paper has said he would not have been able to pull the man to safety.)

But on the question of what his duty was in the situation, he's unequivocal. "If you have placed yourself in a situation where you can help, you are morally obligated," he says. "The proper thing to do would've been to put down the camera and try to get the guy out. I can understand why people are upset."

"Your job as a human being, so to speak, outweighs your job as a photojournalist," he adds.

This may sound like an uncontroversial position, but within the world of professional photojournalism, it's far from a settled question. Long says that he has "had some knockdown battles" over the years with those who think journalistic objectivity requires not getting involved. Long doesn't buy that. "I don't think it's possible to be totally objective," he says. "Your presence at an event changes the event, at least somewhat.

"You live your life with the values you got somewhere along the line," he says. "I do not approach photojournalism as the be all and end all. It's an honorable profession, but the values I bring to my job come from other sources."

The question of whether the New York Post was right to publish Abbasi's photo is, says Long, "another issue altogether." Newspapers have an obligation to publish images, even horrifying ones, that might affect public debate over important issues. He cites photos of killed U.S. soldiers or drowned bodies in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. "Those pictures ran because we as a society could learn from them and make decisions for society," he says.

A photo of a man about to be hit by a subway wouldn't seem to rise to that level, he says. "If I was the night editor, I don't think I'd run it." However, he adds, "it's a contract between a paper and its readers, and it's different from paper to paper. The New York Post is not known for its subtlety in taste decisions."